Don't "lean" on the Tai Chi Classics

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7QHPErjhs8

DON’T ”LEAN” TOO MUCH ON TAI CHI CLASSICS

Tai Chi Walk

Michael wrote that he has some questions about what he refers to as an understanding of leaning the body in Classical Tai Chi, weight distribution, Tai Chi Classics, and Yin and Yang:

"As I watched Master Hwa's video more intently, I was drawn to the movement of the lower limbs, i.e., from the hips down. Can I assume that master Hwa advocates the separation of ying-yang footing, i.e., 100% weight on one leg and the other 0%, in all postures (except the end of the single whip)? While I understand the weight shifting from one stance to another - I'm interested to know the weight distribution, e.g., brush knee twist step at the end. Is it 100% in the front leg, and the back leg is insubstantial? I'm studying the classics by zhang sang Feng, and it was mentioned that one should not lean on any side. I would interpret this as leaning forward, backward, or at the sides - but if there is 100% weight on one leg, I assume that there is a leaning force involved? "

Hi Michael, I know that Master Hwa has addressed your questions on a previous occasion. As a teacher, I would like to contribute something for discussion on Facebook if possible. In Classical Tai Chi, my teacher, Master Stephen Hwa, explains the principles of movement (the how and why) in terms of Yin and Yang. He also explains the principles in terms of "body weight distribution ."When one moves, they do not let their weight "distribute" itself in an out-of-control manner. Losing control of weight distribution is a grievous error and can have health and martial consequences. This type of error is discussed in detail in the: DVD series, Yahoo Email Group, Classical Tai Chi Forum, Classical Tai Chi Website (Table of Contents for DVD), and in the online course Classical Tai Chi at Teachable.com.

What I discuss is illustrated in the Forward Lean as seen in this video link and several other video links about ”Tai Chi Walk” on Youtube. When one takes a step forward in Classical Tai Chi, the weight stays 100% on the back foot until the front foot is flat on the ground at 0%. The practitioner will pull the body forward till the body weight 100% is on the front foot, with the back foot becoming 0%. The body weight distribution is dynamic, fluid, and continuous through all postures, with no exception.

The words lean, leaning, leaned, etc. are certainly fine in English are they not? However, I think an understanding of "leaning" in Classical Tai Chi should encompass the thought that one should take the Tai Chi Classics with the proverbial "grain of salt." The Classics are, as Master Hwa has said, "attributed to various authors." Regardless of who wrote them, we did not hear of them until Wu Yu Xiang "found them in a Salt Shop." The Classics, for one, do not specify what they mean by "lean." Did the mythical Zhang Sanfeng mean don't lean at all, don't lean too much, etc.? Then there is the definition: 倾斜 This is defined as "incline, tip, bias, slope, etc. I cannot find "lean" defined as "incline" in Chinese. Lean in Chinese is more like "thin" as in a lean piece of meat. I like "incline" better than "lean" for Tai Chi terms, etc. and in pinyin, one says "Qingxie."

The term "incline" is used in the Wu Family Gold Book as elucidated by Grandmaster Wu Kung Cho. He means you do not "incline" by breaking at the waist. You see a lot of "breaking at the waist" in some styles of Tai Chi; it is painful to watch. Master Hwa does use the term "lean." In his explanation, he makes it work in English where "incline" would not. He does not caution against it, as does Zhang Sanfeng; on the contrary, he tells us how and why we need to do it. It is discussed in detail on page 56 of his treatise in the book "Uncovering the Treasure." I think there is a crucial point about not "breaking at the waist" when he says: "The head, the body, and the back leg form a straight line in the lean forward." With that in mind, one can readily see that breaking at the waist would break the straight line and any energy flow.

To sum it up, I think the Classics, while having some key insights, are often filled with "contrariness" and can be very cryptic. I would not conflate basic principles of Classical Tai Chi to the often contrary statements in the Tai Chi Classics; hence "take it with a grain of salt."